Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

California Sets Fines for Spyware

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the pay-to-play dept.

aj50 writes "The BBC has the story that California is introducing new laws to help eradicate spyware. The bill bans the installation of software that can be used to take over another computer and allows customers to seek $1000 in damages if they've fallen victim to this kind of malicious software. Can this really help cut down spyware or will it just be another fatally flawed piece of legislation?"

6 of 199 comments (clear)

  1. Yes! by kngthdn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The RIAA should be fined millions for their infected WMA files.

  2. Re:Watch out for the loophole! by Chess_the_cat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Or "software provider" which would cover the spyware authors themselves. Surely Claria Corporation is a software provider.

    --
    Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
  3. Re:Watch out for the loophole! by mtrisk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    or detection or prevention of the unauthorized use of or fraudulent or other illegal activities in connection with a network, service, or computer software, including scanning for and removing software proscribed under this chapter

    I think they just made it explicitly legal for the MPAA, RIAA, or BSA to install spyware on your computer to counter copyright infringment. What a shame, a rotten egg in a perfectly good law.

    --

    Without a proper flamewar, Anonymous was undecided on what shell to run.
  4. Re:Watch out for the loophole! by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yes, but only if it is for "detection or prevention of the unauthorized use or fradulent or other illegal activities in connection with a network". Collecting statistics for advertising purposes doesn't count. They might try for dual use, but the law actually makes the second use illegal.

    --

    -WolfWithoutAClause

    "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
  5. software that can be used to take over another by frovingslosh · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Yea, I question the wisdom of this wording too. On the one hand my first bad experience with spyware was a piece of software that had Internet supplied advertising in it. I didn't mind the advertising at all and welcomed the chance for the author to earn a few bucks, even occasionally clicked on an ad. But after a lot of users of the software started reporting very strange problems with it I investigated and found that the advertising company was Aureaut, and that the software did a lot more than just display ads. Worse, it contained a "feature" that would let Aureaut download and run any program on your machine. This was supposedly in there so they could update their software, but the potential for abuse was obvious and complete.

    Unfortunately, I don't see how the ban on installation of software that can be used to take over another computer... can be enforced, without completely outlawing any software upgrade service. Maybe the law is better worded than the article, but from experience I have my doubts.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  6. Re:Group Fights Back by njcoder · · Score: 4, Interesting

    $1,000? That's small enough for a small claims court. Things are a bit easier in small claims court. Imagine the impact of a million small claims court cases vs one large class action lawsuit where the only one that wins are the attorneys.

    --
    Open Source Java DAO Generator